AddToAny

Two-Child Policy in the Philippines?

My article entitled "A Two-Child Policy in the Catholic Philippines?" has been published in the May, 2009 issue of the Catholic World Report published by Ignatius Press. It can be found at pp. 34-35.

The Philippines remains one of the bastions of pro-life legislation in the world, with a Constitution that explicitly proclaims the family as the foundation of the nation (Article XV section 1) and affirms the sanctity of unborn life beginning from conception (Article II, Section 12). Nevertheless, creeping secularization and the spread of "modern" sexual mores to the Philippines has been manifesting itself in the decline of Church marriages, the increase of cohabitation, the widespread use of contraception (the Philippines is now down to 1.95% annual population growth rate) and the public's acceptance of permissive sexual attitudes.

The current legislative drive for laws pushing for more aggressive promotion of contraception and legalizing divorce and abortion has the "two-child policy" as one of its cornerstones. While the legislators pushing for this claim that no force and no punitive measures will be employed as the state "assists" families in meeting this ideal, the reality on the ground is that local government officials can be expected to be rather aggressive in pushing for zero or negative population growth in their areas, once the bills that embody this mentality are passed into law.

The 1.95% anuual population growth still translates to 3.27 children born to every woman, well above the replacement ratio of 2.1 children per woman. Only Islamic countries have childbirth levels that match or surpass this. Increased use of contraception has certainly reduced population growth from 3-4% annually from several decades ago, but contraceptive use in the Philippines is still low.

The steam-roller globalisation politics of the godless UN and EU march on. If nations do not cede to demographic suicide then they will be financially bullied into submission. Poland and Ireland are discovering this social democratic privilege of EU membership.

Judging by the behaviour of many from the Philippines around SEAsia and in the NO churches nominalisation of faith is proceeding rapidly. Many of them are an absolute embarrassment. Some mohamaten colleagues of mine were horrified at the manner of their dress & deportment on Sunday going into church, a so-called holy place. I could only agree and tell them that in the traditional church this was not allowed and described the customary mode of dress and behavioural norms which they recognised as more appropriate.

If it is, I wish you would take ownership and responsibility for your moderator Jordans.

Jordan makes remarks that are offensive and is not objective. He or she opens up controversy and pretends to be a subject matter expert but isn't, then retreats by shutting the thread down when challenged more than once or twice.

This latest round about St. Dominic is particularly glaring. Jordan smugly offends a Holy Religious Brother, 13 Popes, an entire religious order and proudly proclaims that his couple of articles are God's latest truth.

Jordan certainly hasn't convinced me of his/her view (though I am willing to investigate the sources if they were provided).

New Catholic, can you imagine that people won't be a tad upset? Please don't allow Jordan to open up such controversy and also control the discussion. Jordan can't handle it and you loose credibility in my view.

Jordan wished the good Brother an enjoyable Ascension Thursday. The Mass readings are particularly telling, "...He upbraided them with their incredulity and hardness of heart, because they did not believe them who had seen Him after after He had risen again."

Jordanes is an excellent moderator. His comments reflect his own positions, as it should be clear.

The question here should be, however: why DO we need moderators? This job of previously approving messages is tedious and tiresome, and the moderators here do it for free.

Jordanes has witnessed how hard I have tried to leave the comment boxes with only light moderation, merely controlling comments after they have been posted. This has proved impossible, mostly because of some disturbing messages that often show up; most of these, I am sorry to say, of an Anti-Semitic nature.

If all readers and commentators would help us, moderating themselves and their impulses before posting a comment as well as understanding that non-Catholic readers should not be scandalized by what they read in the comment boxes, there would be no need for prior moderation of comments. All moderators certainly have better things to do than to read every single posted comment.

As far as I am concerned, Jordanes is ok, although I was chastized by him on a some occasions.

His policy is not to rock the boat when one discusses the SSPX, so one has to go along with it or quit. Altough I disagree, I prefer it to setting my own blog.

So, that is what I would suggest to the Anonymous who would like see Jordanes sacked.

In view of the Church's duty to work fo restoration of unity of all those who believe that they are followers of Chirst, I would like to see a moderation, or an instant correction, of offensive language referred to those who have inherited their separated status, and are nevertheless our brothers in Christ. The same principle is applicble to those who belong to other religions, particularly to the Jews and Moslems.

"Is Freemasonry strong in the Philippines and has it something to do with this Two-Child Policy?"

Is Freemasonry strong in the Philippines? Yes, although it tends to be of the "Anglo-American" variety and does not engage in regular acts of overt anticlericalism. Of course, this does not change one bit about the Church's condemnation of Freemasonry, although the Philippine Church's handling of Freemasonry is spotty and inconsistent.

Does it have something to do with the Two-Child Policy? I don't have direct proof. I think that the foreign chambers of commerce and international NGO's in the Philippines have more to do with it than the Filipino Masons.

This is a very good reputable website that is fairly moderated. Discussion is usually made without any name-calling or offensive personal comments unless the odd "anonymous" one manages to slip through.

One area that New Catholic has come a long way on in recent times is his coverage of SSPX. I must congratulate him for this.

It is also excellent that SE Asia has coverage since this is neglected mostly elsewhere.

I'll tell you exactly how the Philippines turned into a sex-oriented nation: The United States military.

You don't have to look for Freemasons, the UN, the EU, or even Planned Parenthood. It was American servicemen looking for extramarital sex. OUR sins undermined and destroyed the Catholic Culture there. Plain and simple.

And now we will continue to occupy countries in the middle east until we can turn their women into sex slaves and give them a contraceptive mentality. Once they to start willingly line up for abortions, then the work of the U.S. is done, we can go home and then just go back for sex-oriented vacations.